State money transmission laws are very strict, requiring, among other things, a bond to be posted to protect the public.
Accoring to FinCEN, anyone selling units of a decentralised virtual currency to another person for real currency is a money transmitter--so, for example, if you operated a business exchanging U.S. dollars for Bitcoins, you must be licensed. I don't know if the Bitcoin Foundation did this in California; perhaps there is some other wrinkle of state law at play here.
As you might guess, we have deep expertise on-hand for the Foundation as to MTB/MSB laws, and can confidently state we do not engage in MTB or MSB activity at the Bitcoin Foundation; we're just a member organization.
The state of California is blanket C&D-ing all Bitcoin businesses.
I wouldn't be surprised if the C&D were blanket. That said, when you Google for "Bitcoin Foundation" you see an "About" section in the #1 result (your website) which begins, "Our mission is to help people exchange...". I wouldn't put it past the state not to have read any further. ;-)
The Bitcoin foundation does neither exchange or trade Bitcoins, nor does it release any Bitcoin client. Its only mission is to "standardize, protect and promote" the use of Bitcoin.
Charging the Bitcoin foundations for violations against the money transmission laws would be like charging NRA for violations against firearm laws. This would be a very alarming precedent and would basically violate your rights for free speech.
That's a two way street. I'm guessing the Bitcoin Foundation might have overlooked some of its due diligence obligations; it looks to me like CA is 'piercing the corporate veil' if you're familiar with that legal term.